Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Employee 'admits' murdering couple... 'while high on meth' [Maricopa, Arizona]
Daily Mail UK ^ | Thursday, July 2, 2015 | Reporter

Posted on 07/02/2015 3:54:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv

An Arizona man charged with killing a married couple who went missing more than a week ago 'essentially confessed' to shooting them dead during a suspected drug deal gone wrong and then burying the bodies in his backyard, authorities revealed this afternoon.

Jose Valenzuela, 38, of Maricopa, was arrested early Thursday morning on two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of Michael and Tina Careccia.

The couple, who have five children between the two of them, were last seen alive leaving their Maricopa home on the morning of June 22. Mr Careccia's 17-year-old son reported them missing that night after he could not reach them.

Jose Valenzuela was taken into custody after police officers discovered the bodies of a man and a woman buried in Valenzuela’s backyard.

During a press conference Thursday afternoon, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu told reporters that when questioned by police, Valenzuela 'essentially confessed' to the murders, recounting for the officers how he shot the husband and wife with a .22-caliber handgun and then borrowed a backhoe to bury their bodies behind his house.

Deputies were able to recover the suspected murder weapon while executing a search warrant at Valenzuela’s house Wednesday...

The couple's abandoned 2008 Honda Accord was found Monday about a half-mile away from their home, covered in dirt.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: arizona; homosexualagenda; josevalenzuela; libertarians; maricopa; medicalmarijuana; meth; methfreak; michaelcareccia; obamanation; tinacareccia; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last
To: eastforker
the meth use did not prevent him from realizing he did wrong to the point he borrowed a backhoe, dug a hole and buried them.

Excellent point! While it's safe to say the meth didn't improve his thinking process, it's rank emotionalism to say his crime is an "indictment" of meth, or drugs in general.

41 posted on 07/03/2015 8:07:14 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Fresh Wind
If drugs are legalized all drug crime will be eliminated because drugs will be readily available,

Not eliminated but reduced to no more than the level of alcohol crime.

and if you can't afford them, the government will give you your daily fix dose of medicine free of charge.

I'm against that (as is every libertarian I know of).

And since all the stress involved in procuring drugs will be eliminated, the possibility of the self-medicated going nuts and killing people for the joy of it will be a thing of the past.

"Stress" is the opposite of "joy." But I think you're right that lowering legally-imposed stress will reduce violence. As for "self-medicated going nuts and killing people for the joy of it": I know of no case where someone known to have no propensity for violence for the joy of it acquired that propensity under the influence of any drug; it seems that people with a propensity for antisocial behavior are disproportionately likely to use legal and illegal drugs.

42 posted on 07/03/2015 8:15:19 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Paulie
I am not against legalization of drugs (if regulated).

Of course they'd be regulated, as pot is in the states that have legalized it and as the drug alcohol is in every state.

drugs are at the root of many a crime; they are not victimless.

If someone commits a crime while underslept, do we conclude that sleeping too little is "not victimless"?

43 posted on 07/03/2015 8:18:53 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Paulie
Hey genius - learn how to spell. It’s SERIOUS.

I knew that. I guess you missed the sarcasm...

44 posted on 07/03/2015 3:00:40 PM PDT by sargon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sargon; Paulie
A Google search for "seriesly" site:freerepublic.com/focus returns almost 20,000 results.
45 posted on 07/03/2015 4:40:05 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Paulie
Don’t you find it hard to breathe with you head up your ass all the time?

As opposed to not breathing because the male sex anatomy is in your mouth, like yours?

46 posted on 07/03/2015 4:42:36 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"Never wrestle a pig; you'll both get muddy and the pig will enjoy it."
47 posted on 07/03/2015 4:51:17 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson